Waddy v. Riggleman

Waddy contracted to buy land from the Rigglemans, with a provision requiring conveyance free of liens by a specific closing date; the parties later amended the contract to add acreage and extend the closing date. The Rigglemans' attorney failed to secure necessary mortgage releases by the deadline, and the Rigglemans backed out, later selling a larger portion of land affecting the property Waddy sought to buy. Waddy sued, and the trial court directed a verdict for the Rigglemans on impracticability grounds.

Whether the doctrine of impracticability may be used by a party to avoid a contract if that party failed to take virtually every action within its power to perform the duties required by the agreement.